I guess the Americans would say the training flights are justified because North Korea has been so hostile to the South just recently with repeated threats to invade.Either way, it is creating a tit-for-tat situation that looks worryingly like it could slip into something more serious with little provocation at this rate. Let's hope China or one of the North Korean allies can reign in their side and the West can calm down the US.

Are North Korea marching into the south, no??? The American's have a history of imperialist capitalist agitation against any socialists states so I am inclined to think that what we hear in the Western corporate press should be questioned.

Well Western spin or not, I'd be pretty worried if I lived in South Korea right now. If you disregard media reports, it is impossible to judge whose 'fault' the current escalation is but, from a less Western perspective, the fact that China and Russia are speaking out against North Korea and urging calm on all sides seems to imply they think a line has been crossed on both sides.

Its interesting really the other two nations were socialist (state capitalist now because of American agitation) have never had expansionist plans themselves and are always calling for diplomacy. I hope America listens. As regards Nuclear, America won't get rid of theirs.

North Korea has always relied on bluff to some extent. It can bank on its neighbours to respond to its tantrums by easing a few sanctions or granting a few concessions to cool things down a bit.The trouble with playing these games with the US is that America is probably not the kind of country to react as expected. They like to be seen to fight fire with fire.

To be honest, right now I think the Americans are going to stoke this one up beyond what is sensible for whatever reasons they have and we're going to get dragged into it on account of the "special relationship". North Korea presumably know that, I wonder what they are trying to achieve?

It's fairly typical NK rhetoric. They're looking to boost their bargaining position before the next round of talks. They always do this so that they can get some more free food from their evil Capitalist neighbours. Not that communism has any shortcomings, of course.

Watch to see how China reacts. Do they really want a hot war on their doorstep?

Oh, and ignore Mini because she lives in the wrong decade and the wrong country. 1950s Stalinist Russia is <- THAT WAY. 'Western capitalist media', seriously what?

Forgive me asking a blindingly stupid question . We know how awful life is for people in NK, lack of food etc. Are we sure they have nuclear weapons or it's just them bullshitting? Can't the rest of the world invade and free everyone? Surely we have more knowledge about them than they do about us so could get in easily.

And we can't just go in (no one has the troops nearby except China, who wouldn't, both politically and as it may well be their cities that were hit if if a missile were launched and not successfully intercepted).

Forgive me asking a blindingly stupid question blush. We know how awful life is for people in NK, lack of food etc. Are we sure they have nuclear weapons or it's just them bullshitting?

We can tell when they set off a nuclear weapon because they do it underground and seismographs pick up the shockwave. A nuke detonation has a very specific shockwave.

Can't the rest of the world invade and free everyone?

What? Why? Assuming we did 'invade and free everyone', who would we install as replacement? There's no government-in-waiting, it's a Stalinist state where anyone who says "That Kim bloke's a bit of a wrong-un" gets shipped off to the Gulag, from which they do not return.

Surely we have more knowledge about them than they do about us so could get in easily.

The 38th Parallel - the border between NK and SK - is the most heavily defended in the world. The casualties from a land-borne invasion would be catastrophic.

Or are SK just too much at risk if anyone starts a war first?

How many casualties do you think the US or British public are prepared to sustain to enforce regime change? The last time they went at it in Korea 36,000 Americans died. This time casualties would be far worse because NK, being a Barking Mad Barry country, would use its nukes. My guess would be at least 10 million dead on both sides.

Apparently they have missiles but not long range enough to get to US mainland.And no capability to attach nuclear warheads to themNot that this is any great comfort to South Korea or the US military bases stationed close by in the East China Sea.

NK declared a state of war on SK this morning. Technically, they've been at war since 1953 because the war then ended with an armistice not a peace treaty but now NK has said it is ripping up any agreements between them and generally upping the ante.

The main worry it seems is that NK has been allowed to get away with provocations on SK in the past (sinking a ship and bombing an island there quite recently) so the South may not be so restrained this time if NK do anything else this time round.

We are due to move to South Korea (koje island) in a little over 8 weeks.Dh returned from a visit there last night. I have been Hounding him for information as I'm not entirely convinced its safe enough.

He tells me that he heard nothing about the threat of war and the expat community there are taking it as empty threats as it always has been in the past. I'm not so sure.

I've never much been into history or politic however I am now finding myself sourcing as much information as possible.